Overview
WLD vs GNO is one of the most watched crypto matchups. Beyond headline prices, this comparison blends market structure, technical readings and probabilistic context without promising outcomes.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | WLD | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.315700 | $104.86 |
| Market Cap | $1.13B | $276.73M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $9.97M | $77,613.35 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 61.00 | 130.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.50% | +3.50% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | WLD | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +4.85% | +1.75% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | WLD | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 54.31 | 54.31 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 66.45 | 66.45 |
| ADX | 20.44 | 20.44 |
| Support | 1,827.82 | 1,827.82 |
| Resistance | 1,960.30 | 1,960.30 |
| Trend | bearish | bearish |
| Momentum | 59.00 | 59.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Use the indicator table as a checklist: if momentum and trend align on one asset while the other diverges, relative-value setups become more interesting — still without certainty.
Fundamentals
| Metric | WLD | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| Consensus | — | — |
| Blockchain | — | — |
| TPS | — | — |
| Block time | — | — |
| Finality | — | — |
| Validators | — | — |
| Staking | — | — |
| TVL | — | — |
| Supply model | — | — |
| Inflation | — | — |
| Developer activity | — | — |
| Github activity | — | — |
| On-chain activity | — | — |
| Whale activity | — | — |
| Addresses | — | — |
| Gas fees | — | — |
Ecosystem
WLD
GNO
Pros and cons
Pros of WLD
- Composite PEPS readings for WLD can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
- Market-cap scale on WLD may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
- Higher ranking for WLD can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
Cons of WLD
- Large-cap status for WLD can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- When dominance narratives fade, WLD can lag hotter rotation names.
- Crowded positioning around WLD sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
- Regulatory or macro headlines can hit WLD harder simply because it is more visible.
Pros of GNO
- Active volume bursts on GNO sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- Narrative optionality around GNO can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
- GNO can offer higher relative beta when market attention rotates toward its niche.
- Diversifying versus WLD with GNO can change portfolio factor exposure.
Cons of GNO
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave GNO more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for GNO.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Trend failures on GNO often travel faster than on more established assets.
Which looks stronger right now?
Statistically, higher market cap (WLD) often correlates with deeper books, while hotter 24h prints (WLD) can fade. Position sizing should reflect that uncertainty.
AI summary
In about three hundred words of context: WLD (WLD) trades near $0.315700 with a +4.85% day move, while GNO (GNO) is around $104.86 (+1.75%). Volume leadership currently sits with WLD, and market-cap leadership with WLD. Technical trend labels read bearish vs bearish, with RSI near 54.31/54.31. Bottom line: use this page as a structured checklist, then open each coin page and related PEPS tools before acting. Nothing here is financial advice.
FAQ
Which is better, WLD or GNO?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. WLD leads on market cap today, while WLD leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, WLD or GNO?
Higher-beta assets can move more in both directions. Use performance tables and volatility, not headlines, to judge potential ranges.
Which is less risky right now?
Lower volatility and deeper liquidity usually imply milder path risk, but crypto tails remain large for both WLD and GNO.
Which has stronger developer activity?
Check the fundamentals table for developer/github fields when populated. Missing values mean the feed has no reliable reading yet.
Which looks more decentralized?
Decentralization is multi-dimensional (validators, client diversity, token distribution). This page surfaces available consensus/validator fields without over-claiming.
Which has lower fees?
Fee comparisons belong to each network’s fee market. Where gas/fee metrics exist in fundamentals, compare them; otherwise verify on explorers.
Which is better for investing?
Investing choices need personal constraints. Use this comparison as research input, then size positions with an explicit invalidation plan.
Which is better for staking?
If staking fields are present, compare yield mechanics and lockups off-platform. Staking returns are not risk-free.
Which is more used day to day?
Volume, on-chain activity and ecosystem links are practical usage proxies. WLD currently leads traded volume on this snapshot.
Which has the better recent performance?
See the performance table across 1h through 1y. The 24h leader is WLD, but longer windows can disagree.